OCZ DDR2 PC2-6400 Platinum EB
To get this next batch of results, we manually lowered the latencies of each memory kit as low was the BIOS would allow, bumped up the memory voltage by 0.1V for each set of RAM, and slowly raised their clock speeds until our test system was no longer stable. We found that the Corsair XMS2 and OCZ's PC2-6400 modules were both able to hit the tightest timings at 3-2-2-4 on the Asus P5WD2, with a maximum bus speed of 204MHz at a volatge of 2.2V. As we reported before, the Kingston RAM would only be stable at 3-4-4-4 timings at these voltages; anything lower would prevent us from booting. We were able to hit the same bus speed at these timings as well. So, in the graphs below, we have all memory kits performing at the lowest latencies possible while overclocked slightly to a 204MHz FSB (340MHz Memory Clock).
 |
|
With the BIOS set at a 3:5 clock/memory divider, a 204MHz FSB equates to a 340MHz memory clock (680MHz DDR) for all modules. Not surprisingly, the two sets that were able to run at the tightest timings, Corsair and OCZ, came out on top, although the margin of difference appeared to be roughly the same as before. Corsair maintained its lead over the two other sets in both SANDRA benchmarks.
 |
|
We've included the original 'By SPD' results in these graphs to show how the memory kits performed better with lower latencies and higher speeds. Each set gained about 80-90 points in this second running of PCMark05, so the order of the kits remains the same. We noticed that the Kingston set actually gained the most of the three kits, pointing out that there was no big disadvantage in running at 3-4-4-4.
|
|
When we re-ran the Unreal Tournament 2004 benchmarks, every memory kit saw frame rates increase by about 2 frames per second. There's still a tighter grouping between OCZ and Corsair's kits, as opposed to Kingston's set, which remained in third place.
